Re: PC: Name discussion is closed

Subject: Re: PC: Name discussion is closed

From: Jejunabra@xxxxxxx

Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1998 17:26:19 EST

The New York and Long Branch Railroad is an example of joint operation at its
best. The trains operated over the line were just about evenly split between
the PRR and the Central of New Jersey. Both the Pennsy and CNJ issued
timetables covering their respective trains on this line,until 1967, when a
joint timetable covering both lines" trains began to be issued. This is called
Form LB2 and replaced the Pennsy Form 38 and the CNJ TT103 which were
individual efforts. I have a number of the New York and Long Branch employee
timetables, the last of which were printed in the CNJ format although the Penn
Central rulebook governed the railroad. Another example of joint operation was
the Pennsylvania Reading Seashore Lines, which was jointly owned by PRR(PC)
and the Reading Company, which provided service to Southern New Jersey.
Equipment came from both railroads, though the PRR supplied most of the
passenger equipment. Timetables were printed in the Pennsy format and the the
rulebook of the PRR governed operation, though management personnell came from
both railroads. These are the two outstanding examples where the Pennsy and
later Penn Central colaborated with others for joint ownership and/or
operation of a railroad, where the two companies that owned the third railroad
had duplicative lines, in the case of PRSL, while the New York and Long Branch
was a joint operation right from the beginning. What made the New York and
Long Branch unique among these two joint operations, was the railroad had no
equipment of its own but merely supplied the tracks and facilities for its
owners. I hope this discussion gets constructive things going.
Jim Mancuso